Inspection on 21/06/05 for Priory Court Care Home

This inspection was carried out on 21st June 2005.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Priory Court Care Home 13/02/09

Priory Court Care Home 21/04/08

Priory Court Care Home 20/01/08

Priory Court Care Home 24/04/07

Priory Court Care Home 27/09/05

Priory Court Care Home 16/09/04

Priory Court Care Home 13/06/04

Similar services:

The Shelley

Springfield House

Sutton Lodge Nursing Home

St Helier`s Residential Hotel

St Joseph`s

Ridgemount

Wingham Court

Old Hastings House

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 09/07/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Priory Court Old Schools Lane, Ewell Village, Surrey, KT17 1TJ Lead Inspector Catherine Campbell-Ace Announced 21 June 2005 09:40 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Priory Court Care Home Address Old Schools Lane, Ewell Village, Surrey, KT17 1TJ Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) 01999 999999 01999 999999 St Cloud Care Plc Ms Susan Elizabeth Crayden CRH Care Home 60 Category(ies) of DE(E) Dementia - over 65, 7 registration, with number OP Old age, 53 of places Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. The age/age range of the persons to be accommodated will be: 65 YEARS AND OVER 2. Of the 60 service users accommodated, 30 may be accommodated for residental care and 30 may be accomodated for nursing care. 3. The Category Dementia - over 65 years of age DE(E) is a decreasing category, no further service users within category DE(E) must be admitted to the home. Date of last inspection 16 September 2004 Brief Description of the Service: Priory Court is a detached property with its own gardens. The service is currently registered for sixty older people providing both residential and nursing care. The service provides a range of activities and facilities for Service Users within the service and in the local community. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection lasted 5 hours. The owner, general manager, registered manager, administrator, service users and staff assisted the inspector, who was made welcome during the inspection. Daily records, recruitment files, medication records and activity of daily living records were evidenced and were found to be comprehensive, and written clearly. The inspector spoke with a number of service users and asked for their views on the home. One service user said: ‘Staff are so nice, I’m always able to have visitors.’ Another said: ‘ Staff are very sweet to me – they are darlings!’ What the service does well: The home has a relaxed and friendly atmosphere. Service users were observed to be enjoying the sunshine with visitors outside in the garden. They looked well cared for, with clean hair and appropriate clothing. On the day of inspection the weather was very hot and it was pleasing to see the service users with plenty of fluids to drink, within easy reach. Activities were varied and included outings to the sea side, pub lunches and picnics in the local gardens. The activities coordinator was especially interested in increasing the outings and other activities for service users. A monthly chronicle was published with information about activities and news about the home, especially news about the duck and ducklings, which had taken up residence in the courtyard. The home was observed to be clean and tidy, with a garden in which to relax. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 6 What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Following the inspection, requirements were made: • Fire doors were observed to be wedged open, due to the closing mechanisms of some of the doors being out of order. Families had brought in ornamental door stoppers for the service user’s bedrooms, even though the inspector was told that the majority of doors closed when the fire alarm sounds. The doors must have the closing mechanisms repaired and door wedges are not to be used. Fridge temperature records were not evidenced, as they were not on the premises on the day of inspection. The manager must ensure that all fridge temperatures are recorded daily and are kept on the premises. The Certificate of Registration displayed in the hallway was a faxed copy. And not the original. The manager must ensure that the original certificate is displayed. The manager must copy the UKCC Pin number cards of Registered Nurses, which displays the expiry date of nurse registration, and place them in employment files. • • • Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 1,3,5 The Statement of Purpose and Service user’s guide are excellent, providing service users and prospective service users with details of the facilities and services enabling an informed decision about admission to the home. EVIDENCE: The Statement of Purpose evidenced was comprehensive and included the names of the Registered Provider and the Registered Manager, activities carried out in the home and the home’s daily routine. It was accompanied with a detailed service user guide and a brochure. It was evidenced that service users were assessed either in hospital or in their own home. One service user’s relative wrote: ‘I remember how excited she was after your visit to St Georges to assess her. She loved you then and never changed her opinion.’ Service users told the inspector that they had the opportunity to visit the home beforehand and move in on a trial basis. Families were encouraged to take part in this process. One service user stated ‘this was the best home – I was able to Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 9 come with my son and choose the home – I’m very happy here, the best place I’ve been. My son is delighted.’ Service users usually had one month to make up their mind whether this would be their permanent home, but were allowed longer if necessary. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7,8,9,11 There is a clear and consistent care planning system in place that provides staff with the information they need to satisfactorily meet the service user’s needs. The systems for administrating medication are good. EVIDENCE: Care plans inspected were detailed covering all aspects of service user’s assessed needs and stated clearly where support was required and where that support was to be provided. It was evidenced that not all service users were weighed regularly. . A reminder was evidenced for carers, placed on the chest of drawers, for example stating; ‘ Kindly note, J has poor eyesight’ The inspector asked for evidence that fridge temperatures had been recorded, and was told that the chef had taken the recordings home with her. A requirement was made for the manager to ensure that the fridge temperatures are recorded daily and available in the home. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 11 It was pleasing to observe that the service users looked clean and well presented, with hair clean and styled and appropriate clothing worn. Drinks were observed to be within reach and jugs of water on bedside tables or trays. Service users stated that they had appointments with the GP and could see him in their rooms in private. On the day of inspection, one service user was waiting for an eye specialist to see her. The chiropodist and optician visit the home to attend to the service user’s needs. The medication policy was examined and samples of staff signatures were evident. The medication administration records were in order and all medication was stored correctly. The manager stated that the service users are cared for in comfort when dying and their death is handled with dignity. Service users are informed of the death with sensitivity and compassion. It was evidenced that the home had a policy dealing with death and dying. One family member had written: ‘ Your quiet efficiency calmed mum down.’ and: ‘ she was always full of praise for your patience and kindness.’ Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12, 13, 15 Service users were seen to experience a full life with opportunities to take part in varied activities. The meals in this home offer both choice and variety and cater for special diets. EVIDENCE: It was pleasing to observe that service users led a full and active life. Activities offered were varied and tailored to the service user’s choices and abilities. On the day of inspection a large group of service users were playing bingo with various prizes. The manager and staff told the inspector that she had hired a bus and taken a group of service users to the coast last weekend with the help of staff. She said that the service user’s enjoyed the outing. One service user attends a raised flower bed which was full of summer plants. The chef brings in the plants and the service user plants and waters them. Service users made hanging baskets, which were in evidence in the main courtyard. Service users also had the opportunity to go to Bourne Hall for picnics and concerts. A family of ducks and ducklings had taken up residence in the gardens and the service user’s followed their progress with great interest. On the day of inspection, service users were seen to have visits from family and friends. One service user said that her son visits every Friday and is Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 13 delighted with the home. Another is visited daily and is taken home to her daughter’s frequently. Service users spoke well of the food. One service user said that the food was very good and that they were able to choose the day before. Service users said that they could have another choice of food if they did not like the choice given. Menus supplied were examined and found to be varied and balanced. Special diets were catered for such as diabetic or soft pureed food. One service user said that the food was: ‘absolutely marvellous’. Another said: ‘Oh my goodness you can’t beat our food!.’ One service user said that although the food was good, the presentation could be better and the dining room could look more inviting. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 17, 18 Service user’s legal rights are protected by the home’s policies and procedures. Staff have excellent knowledge of Adult Protection Issues which protects service users from abuse. EVIDENCE: The service users informed the inspector that they held their own bank accounts and had access to outside solicitors. Advocacy services were available. The home has a policy on abuse, and when the staff were asked about abuse policies and procedures they were able to answer correctly. They had knowledge of the Protection of Vulnerable Adults Procedure and had attended training on this subject. Staff files sampled evidenced that CRB checks had taken place and no staff commenced employment without clearance. Service users valuables were kept in a safe and receipts for the contents of the safe were evidenced. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19,20,23,24,25,26 The standard of the environment is high providing service users with a safe, attractive and homely place to live, although a number of safety issues ere evidenced that require addressing. EVIDENCE: The home is attractive and affords bright airy communal rooms. Risk assessments on the safety of the home were found to be detailed and in date. Service users care plans evidenced specific risk assessments to the environment of their bedrooms which included action plans. Service users could bring with them small items of furniture and ornaments. The inspector observed service user’s embroidery pictures, photographs of past experiences in the world war 2 and family photographs in the bedrooms. Furnishings were of good quality and suitable for the service user’s needs. The home was very clean with one service user saying: ‘You won’t find a place cleaner than this place I am so impressed with the cleanliness.’ Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 16 Service users were observed to be able to call for assistance easily. It was observed during the inspection that some of the fire door closing mechanisms needed repairing and service users were using wedges or ornaments brought in by relatives to hold the doors open. Immediate requirements have been made to repair the door closing mechanisms and remove the door wedges and ornaments holding the doors open. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 29 Service users are supported by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. EVIDENCE: Recruitment files sampled were evidenced and found to be robust. All necessary documentation was in place including references and CRB checks. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 18 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 35,36,38 The Manager is supported by a well supervised team, who are protected by the home’s policies and efficient record keeping. Service users financial interests were protected and the health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and safeguarded. EVIDENCE: Service users hold their own bank accounts and have easy access to their finances. Written records of transactions were evidenced. A safe is provided for security purposes with records of receipts of possessions handed over for safe keeping evidenced. Staff receive formal supervision at least 6 times a year, and records sampled evidenced this. They contained aspects of practice, philosophy of care and career development needs. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 19 Service user’s doors were observed to be wedged open during the inspection as previously stated. Maintenance records evidenced showed that safety checks had been carried out on bath water temperatures, lift maintenance, hoists and electrical wiring. The last fire drill was carried out in May 2005. Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 20 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score 3 x 3 x 3 x HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 2 9 3 10 x 11 3 DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 4 13 3 14 x 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 1 3 x x 3 3 3 4 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 x 28 x 29 3 30 x MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score x 3 3 x x x x 3 3 x 1 Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 21 yes Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard 19,38 Regulation 23 Requirement That fire doors are not wedged open. All doors with inoperative closing mechanisms must be repaired. That the original certificate of Registration be displayed. that Registered Nurses PIN numbers be copied into the employment files. Timescale for action Immediate 21/06/05 21/07/05 21/07/05 2. 3. 4. 31 29 19 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 22 Commission for Social Care Inspection The Wharf Abbey Mill Business Park Eashing Surrey GU7 2QN National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Priory Court H58 s13850 Priory Court v219004 200605 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 23 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!